I have a nikon D3100 which telephoto lens is much better, nikon 18-300vr2 or sigma 50-500 os for birdings,etc.? Thanks..
24762
I can't speak for the Sigma, but the Nikon 18-300 DX lens is on my D7200 almost all the time. We're serious birders and I'm happy with the reach and sharpness of the Nikon lens. The 18" minimum distance focusing range from 18-300 mm is a real plus for photographing insects and flowers. The extreme light weight of the lens is a big plus as is the 18 mm wide angle for scenery. Focusing is a bit slow, especially in low light. Another comment re. the greater light gathering of the Sigma is probably spot on. I'm seriously considering buying the Sigma lens for that reason. So many bird photos are in dim dawn or sunset light or in shadow. I can't speak for the Sigma, but the Nikon 18-300 DX lens is on my D7200 almost all the time. We're serious birders and I'm happy with the reach and sharpness of the Nikon lens. The 18" minimum distance focusing range from 18-300 mm is a real plus for photographing insects and flowers. The extreme light weight of the lens is a big plus as is the 18 mm wide angle for scenery. Focusing is a bit slow, especially in low light. Another comment re. the greater light gathering of the Sigma is probably spot on. I'm seriously considering buying the Sigma lens for that reason. So many bird... » Read More I can't speak for the Sigma, but the Nikon 18-300 DX lens is on my D7200 almost all the time. We're serious birders and I'm happy with the reach and sharpness of the Nikon lens. The 18" minimum distance focusing range from 18-300 mm is a real plus for photographing insects and flowers. The extreme light weight of the lens is a big plus as is the 18 mm wide angle for scenery. Focusing is a bit slow, especially in low light. Another comment re. the greater light gathering of the Sigma is probably spot on. I'm seriously considering buying the Sigma lens for that reason. So many bird photos are in dim dawn or sunset light or in shadow. « Show Less
24763
The optics are excellent in the Sigma Lens and at 95mm on the front end has better light gathering capability.
24764
I love my Sigma 50-500 I have never used a nikon 18-300 so I can't say about that
24765
I have no experience with Nikon or Nikon lenses. I do have & use regularly Canon 75-300 usm & canon is usm lenses. Both are fine lenses with beautiful results in situations where the subject is close enough for the focal lengths available. I also have & use more often a Sigma 50-500mm f/4.56.5 with Hsm & os. I am an avid birder & the Sigma is my choice. The added reach gives capability to get shots at longer distances with excellent results. The Sigma has a disadvantage in its weight. I regularly get excellent handheld shots even with Sigma 2X teleconverter giving excellent quality photos at effective focal length of 1000mm. This does require use of manual focus mode. I have no experience with Nikon or Nikon lenses. I do have & use regularly Canon 75-300 usm & canon is usm lenses. Both are fine lenses with beautiful results in situations where the subject is close enough for the focal lengths available. I also have & use more often a Sigma 50-500mm f/4.56.5 with Hsm & os. I am an avid birder & the Sigma is my choice. The added reach gives capability to get shots at longer distances with excellent results. The Sigma has a disadvantage in its weight. I regularly get excellent handheld shots even with Sigma 2X teleconverter giving excellent quality photos... » Read More I have no experience with Nikon or Nikon lenses. I do have & use regularly Canon 75-300 usm & canon is usm lenses. Both are fine lenses with beautiful results in situations where the subject is close enough for the focal lengths available. I also have & use more often a Sigma 50-500mm f/4.56.5 with Hsm & os. I am an avid birder & the Sigma is my choice. The added reach gives capability to get shots at longer distances with excellent results. The Sigma has a disadvantage in its weight. I regularly get excellent handheld shots even with Sigma 2X teleconverter giving excellent quality photos at effective focal length of 1000mm. This does require use of manual focus mode. « Show Less
24766
I own both lenses and while the 18-300 is the best walk around lens, the 50-500 is my favorite lens for wildlife and particularly birds. It obviously has 200 more mm reach which results in around 40% more magnification and it is tack sharp throughout it's range. The Sigma 50-500 stays on my camera 90% of the time.
24767
The 50-500 is a great lens...... but it is heavy!! I can't hand hold it to shoot birds. I now use the canon 100-400 for birding which is awesome. If you are gonna use a tripod, the sigma is great choice.
24768
I have both lenses and the real question is how close can you get? Both lenses are great, the Nikon is a little sharper and will focus a little faster on my 5200, but the reach of the Sigma is really nice. another option is the new Tamron 150 to 600 when you can get it with the Nikon mount. So if you can get close the Nikon, if you need more reach the Sigma or the Tamron!
2096570
Depends on what you are planning to use the lens for. If you are into wildlife photography then you may need the 18-300.The 18-200 is a pretty compact lens while the 18-300 is huge and weighs about 10 more ounces. Check out this link to see the relative sizes..........http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/comparisons/DX-super-zooms/index.htm As far as Leon's criticism of this lens is concerned I would definitely not call this a poor lens. Just keep in mind that as with any superzoom there are compromises that have to be made. It would not be fair to compare the sharpness of this lens with a prime lens or with a pro quality zoom lens like the 24-70 f/2.8. So if you are into pixel peeping you will be disappointed. This is a good walk about lens that lets you capture a variety of scenes without having to change lens. This is not a fast lens and needs good lighting to capture good photographs. In summary if you are looking for a portrait lens look elsewhere but if you are looking for a lens that you can travel with and capture vacation memories then the flexibility that this lens provides you is excellent.
150331
Deepak, I am currently using this lens on a Nikon D300 with 12.3 megapixels. I own several Nikkor lenses, ranging from wide angle to 300mm. This 18-200 is the best of all. Since receiving it, I have not taken it off the D300. I use it exclusively. It is a great lens. The VR feature is also fantastic. Low light shots come out great. I would highly recommend this lens for high megapixel cameras. It works great on my D300. I think you will be very happy once you use it too.
572666
Owning both the 55-200VR and the 70-300VR and have compared not only both but two copies of the 55-200 on two Nikon DX cameras against the 70-300. Viewing was done on two hi-def monitors (25" and 27") using close to two thousand pics. Bottom line- the 70-300 blows away the 55-200. It is not even close. The MUCH heavier 70-300 is considerably sharper, colors are balanced and accurate (as they are on the 55-200) but much richer, brighter, with better contrast and much better bokeh. Skin tones and portraits in particular are wonderful with the 70-300. Downside on the 70-300 is that it is heavier. I have read some comments that the 70-300 begins losing sharpness after 200mm but my copy is super sharp at all focal lengths. If you are a serious amature and can justify the price go for the 70-300.
1272575
I have both the Tamron 17-50 and the 28-75 as well as the Tamron 28-300 that I shoot with the Nikon D200. I can't say if I prefer the 17-50 over 28-75 but I love both of them and find I use them both depending on what I'm shooting. If I could afford only 1 lens it would probably be the 28-75 for my type of shooting. If you;'e shooting large groups of people or need the wider angle then I'm sure 17-50 may serve you better.
2133519
As a previous owner of the Canon Rebel, and since you are a first time user, I feel strongly that you will do better with the Nikon D3100. I say this with experience and here's why; the Canon Rebel is a great camera with many features. It's speed, focus and user friendly operations allows for great performance, however, with a price to come with it. I'm not going to tell you the price, only that it is a bit higher than the Nikon. With the Nikon, you get most of the same great features, "easy-to-use" with a guide for "easy shoot", CD/paper instruction manual, plus if you get the D3100 18-55 VR Kit, it comes with a f/3.5-5.6 VR Lens. Both the lens and camera are covered by extensive warranties which come included. (simply register online). I like the 5 year warranty on the lens alone. But price is the most important function, and if you're concerned with reliability, Nikon is just as a trusted name as Canon, so it will last you a while! I hope this shed some light on your decision. One more note, as with a previous answer to your question, about a "booklet" that comes with the camera, the CD version of the "booklet" will allow better visibility and clearer understanding of the example frames shown in the "booklet". The CD opens up the "booklet" to the size of your monitor on your laptop or computer which makes it easier to read. Thanks.
684751
Well, considering your ranges, I think for you it would be nice to have some more options in the wide angle range. For you I recommend the Sigma 10-20mm DSH. This one actually comes at about $470, which is more than half for the comparable Nikon 12-24mm and it is wider by 2mm; which is a lot at this range. Sigma is of course, a third party lens manufacturer. But I assure you that with some research and inspection, you can find a copy that meets your satisfaction. They are other wide angles, but so far sigma comes with the widest of the wide for your camera body. By the way, if I was you, I would trade in your 28-80 and 18-55, keep the 50mm lens and if your 18-200mm happens to be the Nikon 18-200mm DX VR, of course keep it too. When you first start out with SLR systems, you think you want a bunch of lenses, but in reality, you don't. You will be more than satisfy with a set of tree or even two lenses that meet all your photographic needs. Finally, I will state that there is no nicer artistic tool than the exaggeration of perspective that wide angle lenses may provide you.
75252
Thank you for taking the time to answer my question, I ended up buying the Sigma lens and I agree with you when you say that is a great value for the price.So far I'm very happy with this lens, I have used it in both daylight and night time (with external flash) and the results have been excellent with my D5000, the OS is great and focusing is very fast indeed.Again, thank's !George
901101
I would get a Nikon TC-14E II. This is the only Nikon teleconverter that works with the Nikon 300mm f/4. I suggests you see the recommendations at nikon.com and review that lens there.
1516443
Short answer: "Yes!" I sold my 55-250 MM kit lens and bought the 70-300MM for precisely the reason you mention: to get better, closer bird images...in flight and on the feeder. I haven't been disappointed. This is a "sharper" lens than the 55-250 and the extra zoom range really comes in handy. Be aware, though, that the 70-300 MM is both larger and heavier than the other lens. At maximum zoom it is up to 8-1/2" long.
1543697
Yes. I struggled with the decision to buy the 2.0 TC or the sigma 50 -500 lens to get more zoom as 200 didn't reach far enough for my needs. In the end I got the teleconverter as it was less money and mainly a way to avoid another heavy lens. It works out very well. loss of sharpness and some f/stops as others have described but you will hardly notice. faster glass and more sharpness costs thousands of dollars which i'm unwilling to spend. i'm pleased going this way.
1672483
I'm in agreement with you on the lenses making the difference. In terms of image quality it would be near impossible to distinguish images taken with the D3100 and ANY other consumer (APS-C) camera. I have the 35mm 1.8G that captures great images and has a neutral (neither zoom nor wide angle) perspective making it a perfect all around lens. My 50mm 1.8G appears even sharper but the perspective may be a bit tight for some shots. And images from the 70-300VR are far better than the 55-200VR or 55-300VR. The other lens to consider would be the 18-105VR to replace the 18-55VR because the latter lacks enough zoom to make it practical as a single lens solution when you want to travel light. I'm in agreement with you on the lenses making the difference. In terms of image quality it would be near impossible to distinguish images taken with the D3100 and ANY other consumer (APS-C) camera. I have the 35mm 1.8G that captures great images and has a neutral (neither zoom nor wide angle) perspective making it a perfect all around lens. My 50mm 1.8G appears even sharper but the perspective may be a bit tight for some shots. And images from the 70-300VR are far better than the 55-200VR or 55-300VR. The other lens to consider would be the 18-105VR to replace the 18-55VR because the... » Read More I'm in agreement with you on the lenses making the difference. In terms of image quality it would be near impossible to distinguish images taken with the D3100 and ANY other consumer (APS-C) camera. I have the 35mm 1.8G that captures great images and has a neutral (neither zoom nor wide angle) perspective making it a perfect all around lens. My 50mm 1.8G appears even sharper but the perspective may be a bit tight for some shots. And images from the 70-300VR are far better than the 55-200VR or 55-300VR. The other lens to consider would be the 18-105VR to replace the 18-55VR because the latter lacks enough zoom to make it practical as a single lens solution when you want to travel light. « Show Less
185426
i have the d3100 and i love it. since you're a beginner on a budget save the $ and get the cheaper d3100, and stay with the kit lens it comes with. the d3100 can take wonderful photos, and handles very well. the kit lens is a good lens, great for beginners. once you're more advanced with your skills, and you've learned some of the manual modes on the camera, then i'd recommend either the nikon 50mm 1.8g or 35mm 1.8g. one thing you might want to consider adding when you get the camera, is a telephoto lens for reach/zoom. the nikon 55-200mm af-s or 55-300mm af-s are great lenses and will give you more reach, so you can be farther away and get in close to your subjects. just something to think about. oh, another reason i like the d3100 over the d5100 for beginners, it's got a guide mode to teach you how to use the camera. very useful! good luck, let us know what you end up getting.
901100
Nikon will tell you to use the Nikon tc, and that is what I do, the sigma will work but I think focusing is quicker with the nikon.
608748
I have both for my Nikon D300s. Sigma 17-50 2.8 is a much better choice. Range in slightly narrower but indoor performance, portrait photography, and bikes are better.
195300
No. I would go with the 55-250mm lens. I got the 18-55mm and I wish I could do close-ups with birds, but it just isn't possible!
1672480
Nikon D5100 16.2MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF-S DX VR Nikkor Zoom Lens is my pick over either d3200 or d3100, more features and the sensor is better. It is priced between the the 3100 and 3200 also. I think the D3200 overall is an improvement over the d3100. D3200 has entry level features like the d3100, but the sensor is has more megapixel so you get more detail, but at the same time might get more noise in darker situation. I heard the d3200 has improve video.